Notes 239
key. Hence example (1) may be an instance of the simultaneous selection of
high key for phonological reasons and the non-discoursal use of intonation which
may ‘ride[.] on top of the phonological structure’ (ibid. 1186) and indicate the
speaker’s attitude towards his narrative.(^5) Tr was the sole reader to select high key, thus, none of the other readings
signalled an explication of the contrast between what happened before and after
September 11th and generated the implication which Tr’s reading did. Tony
Blair’s production of the text was in accord with Tr’s in that he too selected high
key and signalled that the content of the increment was contrary to the previously
generated discourse expectations.
(^6) An alternate though not necessarily opposing analysis of the high key on try is
that it is a particularizing key. The reader states that try is the only word which can
be used to describe his action. In other words he is attempting to describe rather
than describing. Five of the other ten readers selected high key on try.
(^7) Tony Blair in his original production of the text selected an increment initial
high key on reasonably.
(^8) A number of the medial high keys could have been counted as increment initial
high keys. In T2-Bs-18 and especially in T2-Dc-47 the initial tone unit could have
been notated as a discourse marker/fi lled pause marker and excluded from
increment structure. However, in the interests of completeness a pre-theoretical
decision was made to include everything that could be included within incre-
ment structure. As a result the elements in the initial tone were notated as
suspensive elements and the high keys were classifi ed as medial.
- /↑NOW // ↑WHAT is its \↑PURpose // [T2-Bs-18]
- –ERM // in the SENSE that you are looking... at ↑WHAT is HAPpening in
the \MIDdle east // and what is happening in i\RAQ // and /LEBanon //
and \PAlestine // [T2-Dc-47]
(^9) The other ten readers all projected Sn’s potential minimal increment as an
increment.
(^10) The pattern of a particularizing key being preceded by another high key within
the increment was relatively common. Fifteen medial particularizing keys were
found in increments which contained an earlier high key which either projected
that the content of the increment or of more than one tone unit within the incre-
ment was contrary to the previously generated discourse expectations. In addition
there were three particularizing keys which followed a high key/termination (see
Section 7.3.1).
(^11) Brazil (1997) described key as only occurring on the onset syllable and did not
discuss the pitch level of intervening prominent syllables in the tonic segment
prior to the tonic syllable. He (ibid. 14) recognized that on occasions tone units
will occur with more than two prominent syllables. However, he argued (ibid. 146)
that the presence of extra prominent syllables indicated speaker disengagement
from the context and that the speaker was automatically assigning prominence to
all open-class lexical items. Numerous other scholars such as Crystal and Davy
(1975), Halliday (1970: 131–2) and Tench (1990: 489–93) in their transcriptions